20 Jul 2017 15:28:27
Maybe one of the Eds can clarify something.
I know that as fans we don't have a full grasp of how football finances really work, despite the best efforts of Ed002, etc., to inform us.
I also accept that many fans (me included - I admit! ) blithely write about FFP and expenditure regulations.
Recently, there have been some media articles (I read something by Martin Samuel the other day) about how the FFP regulations have been "changed" and how that made the Everton "project" a much more attractive proposition for Farhad Moshiri and how, as a direct result, the club's recruitment spending (transfers) , infrastructure spending (new stadium) , debt reduction, commercial and sponsorship deals, etc., etc., have been subject to major improvement.
So, my question to the Eds is this: has the FFP landscape changed such that Everton (and other clubs outside the previously "monied" clubs) can now have their owners invest more without falling foul of the previously limiting restrictions imposed by UEFA, etc.?
It seemed to me that although the laudable intention of FFP was to avoid clubs taking on huge debts, in reality it was just a means to keep the cartel of previously monied clubs at the top and effectively keep any aspirational clubs in their place lower down the "food chain" by preventing expenditure/ investment even if those aspirational clubs and their owners could genuinely afford it.
{Ed002's Note - There was a relaxation made about two years ago to allow for "new money" coming in to the club to more one season remove potential sanctions if UEFA are notified before the previous New Year. To the best of my knowledge on theree sides have taken adavntage and done this. It really doesn't impact Everton as they, like all PL sides, have significantly increased revenue from media sources.}
20 Jul 2017 15:41:29
Ed002 - thanks for the info.
{Ed002's Note - You are welcome.}